Elliptical why-questions
dc.contributor.advisor
Pullum, Geoffrey K.
en
dc.contributor.author
Donaldson, James
en
dc.date.accessioned
2014-03-26T16:26:56Z
dc.date.available
2014-03-26T16:26:56Z
dc.date.issued
2013
dc.description.abstract
In this dissertation I argue that why-fragments cannot be explained through syntactic move-and-delete operations. This argument is motivated by the existence of why-fragments that are discourse-initial and, in many cases, without plausible reconstructions. I propose a discourse constraint of agentivity as an alternative to syntactic explanations, and make several observations about elliptical why-questions in general. First, why-fragments may be divided into three classes depending on the source of agentivity: normal, metalinguistic and metaphysical. Second, elliptical why-questions have much in common with Mad Magazine sentences (Akmajian, 1984). Finally, why-fragments may be used to question a particular act or an act in general, while tenseless why-questions may only do the latter.
en
dc.identifier.uri
http://hdl.handle.net/1842/8641
dc.language.iso
en
dc.publisher
The University of Edinburgh
en
dc.subject
tenseless why-questions
en
dc.subject
why-questions
en
dc.title
Elliptical why-questions
en
dc.title.alternative
On elliptical why-questions
dc.type
Thesis or Dissertation
en
dc.type.qualificationlevel
Masters
en
dc.type.qualificationname
MSc Master of Science
en
Files
This item appears in the following Collection(s)